I have left some comments on the document. Apart from a few clarifications and some minor changes, I feel its in a good shape. I think we should move forward with it. We can refine the process, definitions & criteria as we learn.
Dinesh > On Sep 11, 2019, at 11:15 AM, Sumanth Pasupuleti > <sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: > > One more call for any additional comments/ feedback on the release > lifecycle document > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bS6sr-HSrHFjZb0welife6Qx7u3ZDgRiAoENMLYlfz8/edit# > > Thanks, > Sumanth > > On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 1:01 AM Sumanth Pasupuleti < > sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Submitted patch to add release lifecycle information to the website >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-15249 >> >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:57 AM Oleksandr Petrov < >> oleksandr.pet...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Maybe a bit off-topic: >>> >>> Before we cut a release, we should make sure we take care of beta protocol >>> [1], include released driver versions [2] and remove compact storage >>> remainders [3]. Third one is optional, but I'd argue we should do it >>> sooner >>> rather than later. >>> >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14973 >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13951 >>> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13994 >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 1:25 AM Sumanth Pasupuleti < >>> sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks for the feedback Scott. I have incorporated all the incremental >>>> feedback I have thus far. >>>> >>>> Looking for any additional feedback folks may have. >>>> >>>> >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bS6sr-HSrHFjZb0welife6Qx7u3ZDgRiAoENMLYlfz8/edit# >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 11:54 AM Scott Andreas <sc...@paradoxica.net> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks for starting this discussion, Sumanth! Added a round of >>> comments >>>> as >>>>> well. >>>>> >>>>> Summarizing my non-binding feedback: I feel that many of the items >>> under >>>>> "Alpha" and "Beta" should be achieved prior to the release of an >>> alpha, >>>>> especially those related to correctness/safety, scope lock, feature >>>>> completeness, deprecation, and backwards compatibility. Establishing a >>>>> higher standard for official project releases (even at the alpha and >>> beta >>>>> stage) will help us really polish the final build together. >>>>> >>>>> Ideally, I feel that contributors should have completed extensive >>>>> testing/validation to ensure that no critical or severe bugs exist >>> prior >>>> to >>>>> the release of an alpha (e.g., data loss, consistency violations, >>>> incorrect >>>>> responses to queries, etc). Perhaps we can add a line to this effect. >>>>> >>>>> Ensuring that we've met that bar prior to alpha will help us focus the >>>>> final stages of the release on gathering feedback from users + >>> developers >>>>> to validate tooling and automation; compatibility with less >>> commonly-used >>>>> client libraries, testing new features, evaluating performance and >>>>> stability under their workloads, etc. >>>>> >>>>> – Scott >>>>> >>>>> On 6/11/19, 6:45 AM, "Sumanth Pasupuleti" < >>>>> sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the feedback on the product stages/ release life cycle >>>>> document. >>>>> I have incorporated the suggestions and looking for any additional >>>>> feedback >>>>> folks may have. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bS6sr-HSrHFjZb0welife6Qx7u3ZDgRiAoENMLYlfz8/edit# >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Sumanth >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 10:43 PM Scott Andreas < >>> sc...@paradoxica.net >>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Echoing Jon’s point here – >>>>>> >>>>>> JH: “My thinking is I'd like to be able to recommend 4.0.0 as a >>>>> production >>>>>> ready >>>>>> database for business critical cases” >>>>>> >>>>>> I feel that this is a standard that is both appropriate and >>>>> achievable, >>>>>> and one I’m legitimately excited about. >>>>>> >>>>>> Re: the current state of the test plan wiki in Confluence, I owe >>>>> another >>>>>> pass through. There has been a lot of progress here, but I’ve >>> let >>>>> perfect >>>>>> be the enemy of the good in getting updates out. I’ll complete >>> that >>>>> pass >>>>>> later this week. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> >>>>>> — Scott >>>>>> >>>>>>> On May 28, 2019, at 10:48 AM, Dinesh Joshi <djo...@apache.org >>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +1. Wiki could be useful to document what the overall plan. >>> Jira >>>> to >>>>>> track progress. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dinesh >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On May 28, 2019, at 10:20 AM, Joshua McKenzie < >>>>> jmcken...@apache.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The unofficial rule is to not upgrade to prod till .10 is >>> cut. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> FWIW, I believe it's historically .6. Which is still not a >>> great >>>>> look >>>>>> for >>>>>>>> the project. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There's a ton of work going into testing 4.0 already. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> While I intuitively and anecdotally (from the people I've >>>>> backchanneled >>>>>>>> with) believe this to be true as well, the referenced wiki >>>>> page[1] and >>>>>>>> jql[2] doesn't look like it's an up to date reflection of the >>>>> testing >>>>>>>> efforts going on. Is there another place this information is >>>>> stored / >>>>>>>> queryable we can surface to people to keep us all >>> coordinated? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/4.0+Quality%3A+Components+and+Test+Plans >>>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14862?jql=project%20%3D%20CASSANDRA%20AND%20%20labels%20%3D%204.0-QA >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:57 PM sankalp kohli < >>>>> kohlisank...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Jon, >>>>>>>>> When you say 4.0 release, how do u match it with >>> 3.0 >>>>> minor >>>>>>>>> releases. The unofficial rule is to not upgrade to prod till >>>> .10 >>>>> is >>>>>> cut. >>>>>>>>> Also due to heavy investment in testing, I dont think it >>> will >>>>> take as >>>>>> long >>>>>>>>> as 3.0 but want to know what is your thinking with this. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>> Sankalp >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 9:40 AM Jon Haddad < >>> j...@jonhaddad.com >>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sept is a pretty long ways off. I think the ideal case is >>> we >>>>> can >>>>>>>>> announce >>>>>>>>>> 4.0 release at the summit. I'm not putting this as a "do >>> or >>>>> die" >>>>>> date, >>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>> I don't think we need to announce it or make promises. >>>>> Sticking with >>>>>>>>> "when >>>>>>>>>> it's ready" is the right approach, but we need a target, >>> and >>>>> this is >>>>>> imo >>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>> good one. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This date also gives us a pretty good runway. We could cut >>>> our >>>>> first >>>>>>>>>> alphas in mid June / early July, betas in August and >>> release >>>> in >>>>> Sept. >>>>>>>>>> There's a ton of work going into testing 4.0 already. >>>>>>>>>> Landing CASSANDRA-15066 will put us in a pretty good spot. >>>>> We've >>>>>>>>> developed >>>>>>>>>> tooling at TLP that will make it a lot easier to spin up >>> dev >>>>> clusters >>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>> AWS as well as stress test them. I've written about this a >>>> few >>>>> times >>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>> the past, and I'll have a few blog posts coming up that >>> will >>>>> help show >>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>> in more details. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There's some other quality of life things we should try to >>>>> hammer out >>>>>>>>>> before then. Updating our default JVM settings would be >>> nice, >>>>> for >>>>>>>>>> example. Improving documentation (the data modeling >>> section >>>> in >>>>>>>>>> particular), fixing the dynamic snitch issues [1], and some >>>>>> improvements >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>> virtual tables like exposing the sstable metadata [2], and >>>>> exposing >>>>>> table >>>>>>>>>> statistics [3] come to mind. The dynamic snitch >>> improvement >>>>> will help >>>>>>>>>> performance in a big way, and the virtual tables will go a >>>> long >>>>> way to >>>>>>>>>> helping with quality of life. I showed a few folks virtual >>>>> tables at >>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> Accelerate conference last week and the missing table >>>>> statistics was a >>>>>>>>> big >>>>>>>>>> shock. If we can get them in, it'll be a big help to >>>> operators. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14459 >>>>>>>>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14630 >>>>>>>>>> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14572 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 2:36 PM Nate McCall < >>>>> zznat...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Sumanth, >>>>>>>>>>> Thank you so much for taking the time to put this >>> together. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>> -Nate >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 3:27 AM Sumanth Pasupuleti < >>>>>>>>>>> sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I have taken an initial stab at documenting release types >>>> and >>>>> exit >>>>>>>>>>> criteria >>>>>>>>>>>> in a google doc, to get us started, and to collaborate >>> on. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bS6sr-HSrHFjZb0welife6Qx7u3ZDgRiAoENMLYlfz8/edit?usp=sharing >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>> Sumanth >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 12:04 PM Dinesh Joshi < >>>>> djo...@apache.org> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sankalp, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Great point. This is the page created for testing. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/4.0+Quality%3A+Components+and+Test+Plans >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we need to define the various release types and >>> the >>>>> exit >>>>>>>>>>> criteria >>>>>>>>>>>>> for each type of release. Anybody want to take a stab at >>>>> this or >>>>>>>>>> start >>>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>>>> thread to discuss it? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Dinesh >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 23, 2019, at 11:57 AM, sankalp kohli < >>>>>>>>>> kohlisank...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there a page where it is written what is expected >>> from >>>>> an >>>>>>>>>>> alpha, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> beta, rc and a 4.0 release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also how are we coming up with Q4 2019 timeline. Is >>> this >>>> for >>>>>>>>> alpha, >>>>>>>>>>>> beta, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rc or 4.0 release? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sankalp >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 11:27 AM Attila Wind >>>>>>>>>> <attilaw@swf.technology >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1+1+1 I read a blog post was talking about last >>> sept(?) >>>> to >>>>>>>>> freeze >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> features and start extensive testing. Maybe its really >>>>> time to >>>>>>>>> hit >>>>>>>>>>> it! >>>>>>>>>>>>> :-) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Attila Wind >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/attilaw >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile: +36 31 7811355 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2019. 05. 23. 19:30, ajs6f wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 in the fullest degree. A date that needs to be >>>> changed >>>>> is >>>>>>>>>> still >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enormously more attractive than no date at all. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Adam Soroka >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 23, 2019, at 12:01 PM, Sumanth Pasupuleti < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spasupul...@netflix.com.INVALID> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Having at least a ballpark target on the website >>> will >>>>>>>>> definitely >>>>>>>>>>>> help. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on setting it to Q4 2019 for now. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 8:52 AM Dinesh Joshi < >>>>>>>>> djo...@apache.org >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 on setting a date. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dinesh >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On May 23, 2019, at 11:07 AM, Michael Shuler < >>>>>>>>>>>>> mich...@pbandjelly.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We've had 4.0 listed as TBD release date for a >>> very >>>>> long >>>>>>>>> time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yesterday, Alexander Dejanovski got a "when's 4.0 >>>>> going to >>>>>>>>>>>> release?" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question after his repair talk and he suggested >>>>> possibly Q4 >>>>>>>>>> 2019. >>>>>>>>>>>>> This >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> morning Nate McCall hinted at possibly being close >>> by >>>>>>>>> ApacheCon >>>>>>>>>>> Las >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vegas >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in September. These got me thinking.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Think we can we shoot for having a 4.0 >>> alpha/beta/rc >>>>> ready >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announce/release at ApacheCon? At that time, we'll >>>> have >>>>> been >>>>>>>>>>> frozen >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for 1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> year, and I think we can. We'll GA release when >>> it's >>>>> ready, >>>>>>>>>> but I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think Q4 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> could be an realistic target. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> With that said, I'd like to change "TBD" on the >>>>> downloads >>>>>>>>> page >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Est. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Q4 2019". We can always push or pull the estimate, >>>> but I >>>>>>>>> think >>>>>>>>>>> it's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have a goal line. This lines up with ApacheCon >>> nicely >>>>> for a >>>>>>>>>>> preview >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any concerns or objections to editing the download >>>>> page? >>>>>>>>> Have >>>>>>>>>>> some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> goal timeframe in mind? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Warm regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>>>>>>> dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >>>>>>>>>> dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>>> dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >>>>>>>>> dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>>> dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >>>>> dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >>>> dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >>>>> dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >>> dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> alex p >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
